[RFC] (Tracking only) Reduce interface of cachecontrol, and make more reliable. #225
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The new status code was introduced with RFC 7538 in April 2015. This makes it so that "308 Permanent Redirect" status codes are treated the same as "301 Moved Permanently" statuses.
This makes it easier to figure out _why_ something fails to look up altogether.
When caching permanent redirects, if `body` is left to `None`, there's an infinite recursion that will lead to the caching to silently fail and not cache anything at all. So instead, make `body` a required parameter, which can be empty (`''`) for cached redirects.
This is to workaround an isort bug that appears fixed in master, where the Transfer-Encoding: chunked line is interpreted as an encoding for the file.
This includes isort, black and some basic hygiene on text files.
This is a fairly common unix extension for backup files used at least by Emacsen and vim.
This would be a bit less efficient in Python 2.7, but it would work on Python 3.x.
This makes it easier to use constants for status codes as well.
This is just a matter of cleanup, I can't think of any good reason for this _not_ to be marked abstract.
This is a bit more nuanced in Python 3, where only EEXIST errors are suppressed, to match the `delete` codepath.
These heuristics disagree with RFC7234, and while there's no reason to stick to their implementation, they seem to be more ill-suited than the default 10%-since-last-modification.
The way this is set up in the module appears to go contrary to RFC7234 by expecting it to be used for validation purposes: https://httpwg.org/specs/rfc7234.html#validation.sent
This includes a "policy" module that includes functions to answer policy decisions on whether to use the cache, whether to cache a certain response, and whether to consider a response fresh. Note that this relies on a full-fledged Cache-Control parser that uses the abnf module, which is Python 3 only.
|
Please adapt the code to the latest master branch and send another PR if necessary. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This includes the heavy-lifting changes that I don't feel are ready for actual review yet.